Suit In Oklahoma Could Knock Out ObamaCare

[eflatminor]

Scott Pruitt, the attorney general of Oklahoma has brought a new lawsuit, on behalf of the state, against ObamaCare.

Unlike the suit brought by 26 state attorneys general, this lawsuit does not make a constitutional objection to the Affordable Care Act. Instead, it uses the language of the law to challenge the elaborate system of subsidies, tax credits and individual or employer mandates and fines the act has spawned.

The Internal Revenue Service has ruled that the language of the statute should be “interpreted” to extend the subsidies to those enrolled in state or federal exchanges, but that’s not what the law says.

Former IRS Director Douglas Shulman, answering a letter from Republican congressmen about whether the subsidies are limited to state exchanges, wrote: "The statute includes language that indicates that individuals are eligible for tax credits whether they are enrolled through a State-based Exchange or a Federally-facilitated Exchange."

Unfortunately for President Obama, the statute implies no such thing. It is not only silent on any subsidies for federal exchanges, it is clear that the subsidies were intended to encourage states to set up exchanges.

This could spell big trouble for this ridiculous law...

Inhofe touts victory in ?dismantling? ObamaCare - The Hill's Floor Action

 

[Duped]

Any way to fight it is welcomed. This is a particularly interesting angle

 

[Politico]

Yeah well the word fight at least applies.

 

[bendog]

Rotta Ruck Rit Rat, Rott.

 

[JakeStarkey]

State authorities cannot change federal law.

 

[bendog]

State authorities cannot change federal law.

More importantly, courts will give deference to the executive body in interpreting legislation, unless there's some obvious hostility to the legislative intent in how a law is interpreted.

And, it's OKLAHOMA. Tom Coburn is a RINO to those people.

 

[BreezeWood]

not to worry -

with gov't firmly in Democrat hands after the 2014 elections, making any appropriate adjustments to ACA will be a top priority.

 

[bendog]

not to worry -

with gov't firmly in Democrat hands after the 2014 elections, making any appropriate adjustments to ACA will be a top priority.

And the re-education camps for TPM? (-:

 

[g5000]

Scott Pruitt, the attorney general of Oklahoma has brought a new lawsuit, on behalf of the state, against ObamaCare.

Unlike the suit brought by 26 state attorneys general, this lawsuit does not make a constitutional objection to the Affordable Care Act. Instead, it uses the language of the law to challenge the elaborate system of subsidies, tax credits and individual or employer mandates and fines the act has spawned.

The Internal Revenue Service has ruled that the language of the statute should be “interpreted” to extend the subsidies to those enrolled in state or federal exchanges, but that’s not what the law says.

Former IRS Director Douglas Shulman, answering a letter from Republican congressmen about whether the subsidies are limited to state exchanges, wrote: "The statute includes language that indicates that individuals are eligible for tax credits whether they are enrolled through a State-based Exchange or a Federally-facilitated Exchange."

Unfortunately for President Obama, the statute implies no such thing. It is not only silent on any subsidies for federal exchanges, it is clear that the subsidies were intended to encourage states to set up exchanges.

This could spell big trouble for this ridiculous law...

Inhofe touts victory in ?dismantling? ObamaCare - The Hill's Floor Action

How many states must use the federal exchange?

36. That's how many.

Those states that have federal exchanges are the ones which opted out of ObamaCare. Mostly red states.

So if this lawsuit results in red states losing insurance subsidies, the Republicans of those states are going to be in for one helluva voter backlash.

 

[g5000]

State-Run Health Exchanges Off to Smoother Start: Report

Minnesota's health exchange is an example of a state-run exchange that is performing well, the newspaper said.

Robyn Skrebes of Minneapolis, who is 32 and had lacked insurance, said she signed up for health coverage in about two hours on Monday using the state-run website, MNsure. She said she purchased a policy for $179 a month, before tax credit subsidies, and also got Medicaid coverage for her 2-year-old daughter, the Times reported.

"I am thrilled," Skrebes said. "It's affordable, good coverage. And the website of the Minnesota exchange was pretty simple to use, pretty straightforward. The language was really clear."

 

[g5000]

Those states which are preventing their citizens from receiving the federal subsidies are going to find a mob of very angry people on their hands.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

State authorities cannot change federal law.

Internet liberals shouldn't pretend to be conservatives

 

[politicalnot]

This is an interesting angle. Too bad it won't work. Any "prudent" person knows this.

 

[HenryBHough]

Bigger question is why we continue the charade of claiming to have more than one branch of government.

 

[Vox]

Scott Pruitt, the attorney general of Oklahoma has brought a new lawsuit, on behalf of the state, against ObamaCare.

Unlike the suit brought by 26 state attorneys general, this lawsuit does not make a constitutional objection to the Affordable Care Act. Instead, it uses the language of the law to challenge the elaborate system of subsidies, tax credits and individual or employer mandates and fines the act has spawned.

The Internal Revenue Service has ruled that the language of the statute should be “interpreted” to extend the subsidies to those enrolled in state or federal exchanges, but that’s not what the law says.

Former IRS Director Douglas Shulman, answering a letter from Republican congressmen about whether the subsidies are limited to state exchanges, wrote: "The statute includes language that indicates that individuals are eligible for tax credits whether they are enrolled through a State-based Exchange or a Federally-facilitated Exchange."

Unfortunately for President Obama, the statute implies no such thing. It is not only silent on any subsidies for federal exchanges, it is clear that the subsidies were intended to encourage states to set up exchanges.

This could spell big trouble for this ridiculous law...

Inhofe touts victory in ?dismantling? ObamaCare - The Hill's Floor Action

there was also one other lawsuit from Virginia based on a premise that the federal law can not worsen the situation for the Virginians - but there has been silence on that.

 

[eflatminor]

State authorities cannot change federal law.

The federal law makes no provision for subsidies for those using the federal exchange...that's the point. Without those subsidies, the house of cards collapses.

 

[Rambunctious]

DUDE! Rep. Sean Duffy SCHOOLS Andrea Mitchell on fairness under Obamacare, even throws Jon Stewart in her face » The Right Scoop -

 

[eflatminor]

This is an interesting angle. Too bad it won't work. Any "prudent" person knows this.

Judge Ronald White of the U.S. District Court disagrees with you.

 

[Vox]

DUDE! Rep. Sean Duffy SCHOOLS Andrea Mitchell on fairness under Obamacare, even throws Jon Stewart in her face » The Right Scoop -

yeah, that is priceless

 

[JakeStarkey]

State authorities cannot change federal law.

The federal law makes no provision for subsidies for those using the federal exchange...that's the point. Without those subsidies, the house of cards collapses.

The state has no standing to challenge the provisions of the law. That is the point.